I hate them both;P because they make me miss stalker even more, but Metro 1 was great, though in hindsight feels more of a prototype imo. If only because the second game eclipsed it as to make it look so, how a sequel should be done.

That claustrophobic feeling as you hear your breathing become laboured and you try not to panic as you run around trying to find an air filter before you suffocate. The Librarians and dodgy weapons that deteriorate with use.

Sure, it's not as polished as Last Light but that's just some of the things that make it better IMO.

That claustrophobic feeling as you hear your breathing become laboured and you try not to panic as you run around trying to find an air filter before you suffocate. The Librarians and dodgy weapons that deteriorate with use.

Sure, it's not as polished as Last Light but that's just some of the things that make it better IMO.

Yeah I'd agree. The first one was more.. sorta, raw. It made it better, it was a little more well done on the storytelling part and a few other things.

One thing I noticed after reinstalling 2033 was the movement difference, with Last Light when you stop you have a gentle slow down > stop curve, a quick one but it's there - in 2033 when you stop you stop like you just hit a brick wall

Hey cool, other post-apocalyptic Moscow afficionados here! Thought I was the "only" one...

same here as V@IO said, gave up on 2033 because of performance issues. But now with my new system I can truly enjoy the experience, just got past the first encounter with lurkers, ugh... bitches, as Bourbon would say

I really like the game and will surely get LL as soon as I finish 2033. I think Metro games have not reviewed as good as they should.

Metro is, in a way, in a genre of it's own (tunnel survival??) and as such shouldn't be directly compared to other titles like Half-Life 2. Sure, it borrows and owes a lot to HL 2 for example, but it's still different from everything else IMO.

And that's exactly what makes it so great, especially as G*Addict and Deathchild described.

BTW I remember laughing my hat off when I read a review of 2033 stating that the "guns are very ineffective". Duh, that's the point kinda, ain't it...

Big difference between 2033 and LL is melee combat introduced in LL. Where in 2033 you should throw knives or shoot with silencer in LL you can stan or kill with knife. Adds to a stealth mode. Another diff is weapon upgrade in LL.

Edit: And I descend to that metro almost every work day. And I know it for more than 30 years. Of course I have never been in tunnels, but imagination is great thing...

If the events depicted in the series ever came to pass, metro 2033 would be the brutal, unaltered reality of what initially happened whereas LL would be a cinematic dramatization of the events that followed.

Metro 2033 is still one of my all time favorite games. I'm not saying Last Light isn't great but I preferred the subtleties in the story and the mystery of the dark ones in 2033. Some of that was lost in LL when the dark one started wearing pants.

2033 performance is horrible even with a 290 Ive just discovered, MSAA = weird shadowing / cloning the image, AAA = fixes that problem but FPS range from 70 right down to 20 in the same inside location

MSAA is unbearable in that game. Light sources also cripple the performance. There was a scene somewhere in the beginning with some gates opening and light coming out, on Ultra the frame rate just halved the instant the light could be seen.